E 



$Z9 



THE RESULT 



OF OUR 



MEXICAN POLICY 




Book 

PRESENTED 111 




*c z i^j2^vv 



A 



//,.,■//,'//'///. y^,//. 



THE RESULT 



OF OUR 



MEXICAN POLICY 



otow^Jl, Wj lliaw (4. H 



THE RESULT OF OUR MEXICAN POLICY 



The ruthless disregard of our rights as a neutral nation and the 
utter contempt shown for our diplomacy by the belligerents of Europe 
is but the inevitable and logical result of our Mexican policy. 

President Wilson's whole Mexican policy started from and has 
hinged upon his assertion that Huerta murdered Madero. Was it 
true ? Wilson says he did. Those in a position to know say he did 
not. If he did not, then Wilson was wrong and Huerta should have 
been recognized as the de facto President, for the refusal to recog- 
nize him has been the cause of all our troubles. 

The crux of the whole Mexican problem, therefore, is, Did Huerta 
cause the death of Madero ? What are the facts ? 

First. Two weeks before Wilson's inauguration, Huerta, under 
Mexican law, became automatically the Provisional President, and 
was so recognized by the Mexican Congress, the body duly authorized 
to decide that question. Moreover, it was a Congress elected at the 
same time as Madero, and was, presumably, a Madero Congress. 

Second. The foreign ambassadors, including Henry Lane Wilson, 
our American ambassador, were competent and impartial witnesses, 
stationed there for the express purpose of watching events. They 
held a joint meeting and unanimously decided that Huerta was the 
de facto President and recommended his recognition as such. The 
other nations followed the advice of their ambassador. America re- 
pudiated hers. 

Third. No American living in Mexico City has accused Huerta 
of this deed. 

Fourth. Some time ago Mr. De la Barra, one of the most respect- 
ed citizens of Mexico and a personal friend of Madero, who fled from 
Mexico after the assassination and who is still an exile, made a state- 
ment that Huerta had nothing to do with the murder. Here is a 
unique witness, whose testimony can not be impeached even by Wil- 
son's partisans. 

Fifth. Prominent American citizens, including members of Con- 
gress, most of them democrats, who have lived on the Mexican bor- 



der all their lives and personally know all the facts and personages 
involved, have told me that De la Barra's statement is correct and 
that Huerta was not responsible for Madero's death. This is their 
history of events. 

When P#rfirio Diaz was forced out of the Presidency, De la Barra, 
because he was not identified with either faction, was chosen Pro- 
visional President, and was so recognized by the United States. An 
election was held, and it was under the presidency of De la Barra 
that Madero was made Permanent President. As De la Barra was 
afterward in Madero's cabinet and was his personal friend, it would 
seem to the sincere searcher after truth that his testimony must be 
more reliable than the impulsive guesswork of Wilson, who sought no 
advice from others, ignored voluntary information proffered by those 
who did know, decided by himself what he would do, and then issued 
his ipse dixit founded on ignorance. Stch was the origin of Wilson's 
Mexican Policy. 

He had no personal knowledge of Mexico, or of its politics or of 
the killing of Madero, was 3500 miles away, was busy moving from 
Princeton to Washington, preparing for his inauguration, selecting his 
cabinet and struggling with a horde of eager office seekers. 

Who was likely to know best, whether Huerta murdered Madero ? 
Was it all these disinterested Ambassadors, who were in a position to 
know, or was it Wilson, who could not possibly know ? Was it De la 
Barra, Madero's friend and cabinet minister, or was it Wilson ? 

Apparently Wilson stands alone without any support. He is con- 
tradicted by the testimony of Mexicans, Americans in Mexico, Ameri- 
cans in Texas, ambassadors and foreigners in civil and official life. 

As Wilson's whole policy from his inauguration to the present day 
has been founded upon his discredited assertion that Huerta mur- 
dered Madero, it follows he made a costly blunder when, instead of 
recognizing Huerta, he told him to "get out "; then allied himself 
with the known bandit Villa, sending to him his personal agent as 
adviser, and allowing him to import arms ; and finally and unjustly 
made war upon the sovereignty of Mexico by seizing Vera Cruz. 

The power to make war is vested by the Constitution in Congress 
alone. 

Although it was none of our business whom the people of Mexico 
selected as their President, we nevertheless made war upon them for 
the express purpose of forcing them to accede to our illegal demands 



in that respect. The partisans of our President contend that his act 
in then sending our Army and Navy to Vera Cruz was not war. If 
it was not war, why did he, after committing the act, ask Congress to 
legalize it ? 

Suppose, for instance, we had notified England she could not have 
George the Fifth for her King, and, in support of that declaration, 
had sent our fleet up the Thames to London and had then forcibly 
collected the customs dues of England and brought the money thus 
collected to New York. Would England call it war ? 

Or suppose we had similarly sent our fleet to Hamburg. Would 
Germany call it war ? To ask the question is to answer it. That is 
exactly what we did to Mexico. 

However classical the note might be asserting it was not war, but 
that it was a lofty and ideal aspiration in the interest of Humanity, 
the reply of any first-class power would be, not a note, but a cannon 
ball. 

Instead of sending our fleet to Tampico, where the flag had been 
insulted, we sent it to Vera Cruz, which, like New York in America, 
is where most of the customs dues of Mexico are collected. 

We forcibly collected those dues, put the money in our pocket, 
brought it to New York, and that same Mexican money is still in our 
pocket. 

We had no moral or legal right to it. It was taken at the cannon's 
mouth. Similar action by an individual would be characterized as 
highway robbery. 

The evacuation of Vera Cruz was as ignominious as its occupation 
was iniquitous. We ostentatiously brought away our dead sailors, 
but we left behind our murdered citizens to rot on the ground, un- 
buried and unsung ; the only thing we buried there was our honor. 

Having notified the warring chieftains that they must get together 
and select a President, they all complied except Carranza. Then the 
President, with his usual inconsistency, immediately recognized Car- 
ranza. 

The flag is still unsaluted. But mark the sequel. Some months 
later, a Mexican Ambassador is sent by Carranza to Washington. 
This diplomatic triumph is duly celebrated by our saluting the flag of 
Mexico. 



The President's demand upon Mexico was that she must salute out 
flag. The result is we salute her flag. Thus our dead are avenged 
and our honor vindicated. 

The nations of Europe were not as oblivious to these epoch making 
events as ourselves. The lesson sank deep into their hearts, their 
minds and their memories. 

Our Government, having done the things it should not have done, 
promptly proceeded to leave undone the things it should have done. 

The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens. That is 
what government is for. 

When the Government sent urgent orders to its consuls to seek out 
every American and notify him at once to leave Mexico, because it no 
longer intended to protect him, it then and there laid the foundation 
for all the diplomatic troubles and contempt which have since been 
heaped upon us. It was the first time in history that any govern- 
ment, however weak, had officially and voluntarily repudiated its sa- 
cred obligations to protect its citizens, and had publicly proclaimed 
its dishonor to an astonished world. 

There were three distinct groups of people in Mexico: ist, the 
Americans ; 2d, the Mexicans ; 3d, the Europeans. 

What was the effect of this unprecedented notice upon these dif- 
ferent groups ? There were forty thousand Americans in Mexico, 
engaged in legitimate business, who had been encouraged to go there 
during the friendly rule of Diaz. (Just as Sec. McAdoois now encour- 
aging Americans to invest money in South America.) They stood 
aghast when notified by their own Government that it would no longer 
protect them, and they fled in terror. 

What was the effect upon the second group, the Mexicans ? They 
were all united in one thing, a common hatred of us because of our 
previous unjustified interference with their domestic affairs. When 
they fully comprehended that the American Government would no 
longer protect its citizens, and saw those citizens abandon all their 
property in hasty flight, they knew their hour for vengeance had 
come and hastened to improve it by murdering the men and raping 
the women. Each unavenged murder was an invitation and an in- 
centive to further slaughter, which went on in accelerated progres- 
sion. 

What was the effect upon the third group, the Europeans ? There 
were several thousand of these, also engaged in business. Under the 



Monroe Doctrine the real and final protection of these European 
nationals devolved upon the United States. America had withdrawn 
its Ambassador. The other nations had recognized the Huerta 
Government as the de facto government, and had their regular lega- 
tions on duty in Mexico City, where they kept vigilant watch over 
their nationals and had full knowledge of all the outrages perpe- 
trated. 

When the United States officially notified the world that it would 
no longer protect American citizens, these ambassadors were at first 
incredulous, but when the murderous events proved it to be true they 
were filled with fear for their own nationals and with contempt for 
us. Their logical conclusion was that if the United States would not 
protect its own citizens it surely would not protect Europeans ; and, 
if not, then the Monroe Doctrine was worthless, and they must them- 
selves do their own protecting. Then it was that we fell from our 
high estate and became the object of their supreme contempt. 

These Ambassadors sat in their offices day after day watching events 
and keeping a record of all the outrages which were well known to 
them. One day it would be murder of Americans in Sonora, of which 
no notice was taken. The next day it would be the killing of Ameri- 
cans in Monterey, of which no notice was taken. Another day out- 
rages in Coahuilla and another day rapes in Chihauhua, of which no 
notice was taken. Day after day the sorry work went on, unnoticed 
by America but known to and reported upon in all the other capitals 
of the world except Washington, where the knowledge was rigorously 
suppressed, until, at last, American diplomacy became a bye word ; 
American honor a subject of derision ; American bravery an object 
of contempt. 

Such was our standing when the European war commenced. 

Germany, realizing her navy was no match for that of England, 
withdrew her fleet and interned her merchant marine as rapidly as 
possible. Events followed rapidly. England made many unwar- 
ranted seizures and declared a paper blockade of the North Sea. 
Germany drew a war zone around the English Islands. England 
issued her Orders in Council, and declared her purpose to starve 
Germany. 

We can well imagine a meeting of the German Cabinet to consider 
the situation and determine upon the course of retaliation. The Ad- 
miral would say, "Our fleet is only half the size of the English ; to 



8 

send it into battle would be to invite its total destruction. If we 
keep it intact, some situation may develop in which we can use it to 
great advantage. Let us retaliate with our submarines, which are 
superior to the English, and destroy their ships, war and merchant, 
one by one, and thus reduce their superiority by attrition." 

We can imagine another Member saying : "To do that will em- 
broil us with the neutral nations and bring down upon us their hatred 
and ill will. There are now no passenger ships left on the ocean 
except those of England. The Americans are great travelers, and 
they are now obliged to travel on English ships. We want the good 
will of America. If we torpedo an English ship, we will surely kill 
Americans." 

"Oh," replies another, " it will make no difference if we do kill a 
few Americans. The United States has officially ceased to protect 
its citizens. Look at Mexico, where hundreds have been killed and 
no notice has been taken of it. Mexico is weak ; Germany is pow- 
erful. America will take no action. Blow them up." 

The Lusitania followed. The seeds thus sown soon ripened, and 
we have ever since been gathering in the harvest of our folly. 

Germany has not disavowed the Lusitania. 

Mexico has not saluted the flag. 

Japan has not refrained from violating the " open-door " treaty and 
the sovereignty of China. 

" None so poor to do us reverence." 

W. H. H. Stowell. 

Amherst, Mass., 

March 8, 1916. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



013 982 493 3 






